Hi Doug, Quad shielded RG-6 with a copper clad steel center conductor is an excellent choice on 160 and 80 meters as long as the cable lengths aren't very long. Outdoor rated quad shielded CCS RG-6 is more readily available at low prices (typically less than 10 cents per foot) than solid copper center conductor RG-6.
RG-6 with a CCS center conductor is a poor choice for the 1500 foot transmission lines to my 160 and 80 meter receiving antennas. I wouldn't hesitate to use CCS RG-6 if my cable lengths were less than 500 feet. 73 Frank W3LPL ---- Original message ---- >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:48:25 -0600 >From: "Doug Renwick" <[email protected]> >Subject: RE: Topband: Measured RG-6 Loss: Solid Copper vs. Copper Clad center >conductor >To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> > >I successfully use 100s and 100s of feet of copper clad steel RG-6 in my >160m 4-square receive setup with a pre-amp at the station. Copper clad >steel works for me. > >Doug > >"Think of all the ways you can hurt yourself laughing." > >-----Original Message----- > >Today I measured the difference in loss (dB per 100 ft) between solid copper >(SC) center conductor RG-6 vs. copper clad steel (CCS) Quad-Core RG-6 >coaxial cable. The difference is not significant until cable lengths exceed >350 feet. You can see the affect of the steel core at 7 MHz and below in >this table. > >The cables were manufactured by two different companies, but the relative >measurements should be valid. > > Solid Copper Cable length in >Freq Copper Clad feet for a 1 dB >MHz Loss Loss loss difference > >1.8 0.3 0.6 350 >3.5 0.4 0.6 500 >7.0 0.6 0.8 500 >10 0.7 0.85 650 >14 0.75 0.9 650 >21 0.9 1.0 1000 >28 1.0 1.1 1000 > >73 >Frank >W3LPL >_________________ >Topband Reflector > _________________ Topband Reflector
